DOCUMENT: CLS-REBUILD · CLASSIFICATION: PUBLIC METHODOLOGY: SYMMETRIC · STATUS: ACTIVE

← Roster

663
Adequate
CHARACTER CREDIT SCORE · 300–850
25/40
Moderate
FOUR PILLARS

Composite 6.43 / 10, weighted per the Constitutional Weight Schedule.

Below the 700 bar, Author's Verdict: not supported.

Lands in the Adequate band at credit 663, below the 700 support line, Author's Verdict: not supported. (See section 7 for the full reasoning.)

★ Service to Country

No military service record. Pre-Senate public service: Lieutenant Governor of Minnesota 2015-2018; chief of staff to Governor Mark Dayton; chief of staff to Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak. Listed as context, not scored.

The 14 measures

Each measure is scored 0–10 against an anchored example, with a cited source. Hover/expand why? for the reasoning.

#MeasureScoreWhy
M01 Duty to Constitution & Rule of Law 7
why?
No documented conduct subverting a constitutional process, no fake-elector activity, no participation in overturning a certified election, no process-defeating maneuver. As a Senate Democrat she was not eligible to sign and did not sign the December 2020 Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus (a House-Republican filing). Impeachment and certification votes are the constitutional process working and are NOT scored here. Solid upholder posture with no criterion-class conduct; held at upper-middle absent an affirmative, costly oath-defense anchor of the McCain class. [source]
M02 Party Over Country 6
why?
Mid-pack-to-moderate bipartisan output, 28th of the Senate on the 117th Lugar Bipartisan Index. Co-founded the bipartisan Senate Mental Health Caucus with Republicans Thom Tillis and Joni Ernst and Democrat Alex Padilla, and carries bipartisan mental-health and rural-broadband legislation. A genuine cross-aisle record, neither top-quartile nor obstructive. Honest middle-high. [source]
M03 Persons of Equal Worth 7
why?
No documented pattern of casting opponents or citizens as enemies who do not belong. The February 2025 vulgar social-media line aimed at a single administration figure is a one-off heat lapse, not an anti-belonging pattern, and is weighed under rhetoric/temperance rather than here. Persons-of-equal-worth posture is intact. [source]
M04 Weaponization of Justice 7
why?
No documented weaponization of state power against rivals or use of office to target opponents. No criterion-class abuse-of-power conduct on record. Upper-middle. [source]
M05 Incitement / Anti-Belonging 6
why?
Generally measured public communication across her tenure, with one documented temperance lapse, a crude February 2025 social-media post directed at a single official. A real drag on decorum, but isolated and not a sustained inflammatory pattern. Net middle. [source]
M06 Fiduciary Conduct 6
why?
A genuine fiduciary appearance-concern: her husband purchased medical-device stocks (Tactile Systems, Artivion) in November 2023 while she serves on the Senate HELP Committee with jurisdiction over that sector. Disclosed per the STOCK Act; no charge, finding, or sanction, and she states she has no role in his investment decisions. Weighed as an appearance-of-impropriety concern, not a finding. Offsetting: voluntary transparency about her own depression history, an act of accountable candor. Honest middle. [source]
M07 Duty to Call Out 5
why?
The higher bar, calling out one's OWN side at cost, is not strongly documented. She is a reliable party-line voice on most contested matters; bipartisan caucus work is collaborative rather than costly self-criticism. No record of a high-cost break with her own coalition. Honest middle, no anchor for the active call-out duty. [source]
M08 The Discretion Test 6
why?
No documented misuse of discretion or self-serving exercise of appointment power. Long pre-Senate executive service (lieutenant governor, gubernatorial chief of staff) without a documented discretion scandal. Solid middle-high; no apex anchor of personal sacrifice for the office. [source]
M09 The No-Camera Test 6
why?
No documented gap between a private contempt and a public persona. Reputation as low-key and even-keeled is consistent on and off camera; the one crude public post cuts against polish but does not reveal a hidden private contempt. Middle-high. [source]
M10 Constituent-vs-Donor Vote 7
why?
Generally aligned with the broad preferences of a lean-Democratic state; constituent-service and rural/broadband focus are documented. No strong donor-capture signal beyond the ordinary; the spousal-trade concern is scored under fiduciary, not here. Upper-middle. [source]
M11 Net-Worth Trajectory 6
why?
Scored ONLY on office-attributable enrichment, not raw wealth (estimated net worth ~$6M is not penalized). The November 2023 spousal medical-device trades, made while she sits on the committee of jurisdiction, are the one office-adjacent appearance-concern, disclosed, uncharged, with disclaimed personal involvement. Weighed as an appearance-of-impropriety concern, not a self-dealing finding. No family-payment, office-info-trade, or foreign-government revenue evidence. Honest middle. [source]
M12 Floor Decorum 7
why?
Sustained institutional decorum and regular-order participation across her tenure, lightly dinged by the February 2025 crude post. Honors the institution more than the spectacle; the lapse is real but isolated. Upper-middle. [source]
M13 Lying & Misleading 7
why?
No sustained documented-falsehood pattern. Public statements track the factual record; the depression-disclosure candor weighs positively for honesty. Upper-middle. [source]
M14 Knowledge Depth 6
why?
Substantive command of her core portfolios, mental-health policy, rural broadband, energy, agriculture, built on a pre-Senate executive background. Competent and detail-oriented rather than a marquee subject-matter authority. Solid middle-high. [source]

Why not higher, the points withheld

The standard is the seat; the ceiling is a perfect 10. Every withheld point traces to documented conduct, weighed where the measures and attributes say it belongs, shown openly here, the same way the earned points are.

WhereDocumented conductMitigation weighed
M06 Husband Archie Smith purchased medical-device stocks (Tactile Systems, Artivion) in November 2023 while she serves on the Senate HELP Committee with jurisdiction over that sector
↳ Fiduciary appearance-of-impropriety
Disclosed per STOCK Act; no charge or finding; she states she has no role in his investment decisions, weighed as appearance-concern, not a finding
M11 Same November 2023 spousal medical-device trades are the one office-adjacent enrichment-appearance concern
↳ office-adjacent appearance-concern
Disclosed, uncharged, disclaimed involvement; raw net worth (~$6M) NOT penalized
M05 February 2025 crude social-media post directed at a single administration official ('billionaire a**hole bosses')
↳ Temperance/decorum lapse
Isolated one-off, not a sustained inflammatory pattern
M07 No documented high-cost call-out of her own side; reliable party-line voice on most contested matters
↳ active call-out duty unmet
Bipartisan caucus and legislation are genuine cross-aisle work, if collaborative rather than costly
Pillar II The February 2025 post is an impulsive break from an otherwise measured communications brand (Temperance)
↳ Temperance drag
Authenticity/Self-Reflection, her depression disclosure shows candor; keeps the drag at 2
Pillar III Spousal-trade conflict appearance while on the committee of jurisdiction (Stewardship)
↳ Stewardship drag
Disclosed and uncharged; no exploitation found

The Four Pillars, worthy to be followed?

A separate axis from the 14 measures. The measures ask did their conduct meet the standard; the Pillars ask is this someone worthy to be elevated and followed at all. The two can diverge, when they do, the divergence is the finding.

#PillarScoreWhy
I Trust & Loyalty
  • Would I follow them into uncertainty or adversity?
  • Would I trust them with my life or reputation?
  • Would I trust them to lead others honorably when the stakes are high?
6
why?
Attributes: Steadiness, Loyalty, Selfless Service, a dependable, low-drama institutional presence with no documented breach of trust. Held at middle by the absence of a high-cost loyalty-to-oath-over-team anchor and the spousal-trade appearance-concern.
II Aspiration & Integrity
  • Do I admire their values and how they live them?
  • Do they reflect the kind of person I hope to become?
  • Do I feel challenged to be better because of their example?
7
why?
Attributes: Authenticity, Self-Reflection, Teachability, her voluntary public disclosure of her own depression history is a genuine act of authentic candor. Lightly dragged by the February 2025 temperance lapse.
III Protection & Influence
  • Would I trust this person to protect what I love most?
  • Would I trust them to influence someone I care deeply about?
  • Would those under their authority be safer and better for it?
6
why?
Attributes: Stewardship, Accountability, bipartisan mental-health and rural-broadband work uses influence constructively. Dragged toward the middle by the committee-jurisdiction spousal-trade appearance-concern.
IV Legacy & Virtue
  • Would I be proud if my child grew up to be like them?
  • Do they embody the virtues I want carried into the future?
  • If their influence continued in others, would the world be better or worse?
6
why?
Attributes: Integrity, Love of Truth, a clean, competent record without a defining oath-defining moment in either direction. The fiduciary appearance-concern and the one crude post are honest drags; nothing approaching criterion-class conduct.
TOTAL: Moderate 25/40

Total 25/40, Adequate. A solid, low-controversy institutional record without an apex character anchor; the documented drags (spousal-trade appearance, one temperance lapse) are weighed honestly rather than erased.

What the Four Pillars are & the questions behind each →

In their own words

“Why I'm sharing my experience with depression.”

Senate floor speech disclosing her own mental-health history while pushing for mental-health funding · Office of Senator Tina Smith · PRINCIPLED · cite

“Launching a bipartisan Senate Mental Health Caucus.”

Co-founding the caucus with Republicans Thom Tillis and Joni Ernst and Democrat Alex Padilla · Office of Senator Tina Smith · CIVIC · cite

“I do not know about and have absolutely no role in any of his investment decisions.”

Responding to scrutiny over her husband's medical-device stock purchases while she serves on the HELP Committee · CapitolTrades reporting · CONTESTED · cite

“I've decided not to run for re-election to the Senate in 2026. This job has been the honor of a lifetime.”

Announcing she would not seek a second full term · Office of Senator Tina Smith · CIVIC · cite

Full personnel file

1. Identity

Tina Flint Smith (born March 4, 1958, Albuquerque NM). U.S. Senator from Minnesota since January 3, 2018, appointed by Governor Mark Dayton to fill the seat vacated by Al Franken, then elected in the 2018 special election and to a full term in 2020. Stanford (B.A., political science, 1980); Dartmouth Tuck (M.B.A., 1984). Earlier roles: vice president, Planned Parenthood MN/ND/SD; chief of staff to Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak; chief of staff to Governor Dayton; 48th Lieutenant Governor of Minnesota 2015-2018. Announced February 13, 2025 that she will not seek re-election; term ends January 2027.

2. Voting / Legislative Profile

Lugar Center / McCourt School Bipartisan Index 117th Congress: ranked 28th in the Senate (score ~0.393), moderate-to-mid bipartisan output. Committee assignments include Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP); Agriculture; Energy and Natural Resources; and Indian Affairs. Signature work: bipartisan Senate Mental Health Caucus (with Tillis, Ernst, Padilla); mental-health workforce and tele-mental-health legislation; rural broadband. Policy positions are NOT scored here in either direction.

3. Constitutional Moments

No documented process-subversion conduct. As a Senate Democrat she was ineligible for and did not sign the December 2020 Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus (a House-Republican filing). Impeachment and election-certification votes are recorded as the constitutional process functioning and are not scored as conduct in either direction.

4. Rhetoric & Discourse Profile

Generally measured public communication with one documented temperance lapse, a crude February 2025 social-media post aimed at a single administration official. Isolated rather than a sustained inflammatory or enemy-making pattern, so it is weighed as a decorum drag, not a criterion-10 flag. Offsetting is her candid public disclosure of her own depression history, an act of honest, humanizing communication.

5. Fiduciary Profile

Estimated net worth ~$6M, not penalized as raw wealth. The one office-adjacent appearance-concern is her husband Archie Smith's November 2023 purchases of medical-device stocks (Tactile Systems, Artivion) while she serves on the committee of jurisdiction (HELP). Disclosed under the STOCK Act; no charge, finding, or sanction; she states she has no role in his investment decisions. Weighed as an appearance-of-impropriety concern, not a self-dealing finding.

6. Severity-Class Conduct

No documented Severity-class conduct under any of the eight criteria. No process-subversion (no Texas v. PA signature, ineligible as a Democrat; no fake-elector or election-overturn activity), and no sustained enemy-making or incitement pattern (the one crude 2025 post is an isolated heat lapse, not a documented pattern). Flag count: zero.

7. What The Framework Says

A solid, low-controversy institutional record without an apex character anchor in either direction. The bipartisan mental-health work and the candid depression disclosure are genuine credits; the documented drags, the spousal medical-device trade appearance-concern while on the committee of jurisdiction, and one crude 2025 post, are weighed honestly as appearance and decorum concerns, not as findings. No criterion-class conduct. An honest middle: competent and clean, short of a defining oath-defense moment.

8. Sources & Where To Look Deeper

Tier 1 (primary): Congress.gov member record · U.S. Senate financial disclosures (eFD)

Tier 2: Lugar Center / McCourt School Bipartisan Index · Ballotpedia

Research links: Congress.gov member profile · Ballotpedia · Senate financial disclosures (eFD) · GovTrack · Wikipedia

Scores derive from the fixed Constitutional Weight Schedule. The bar does not move. Conduct, not party.

SHARE THIS DOSSIER: